Dedicated to Nigeria's History, Socio-Economic and Political issues

Rethinking Political Opposition in Nigeria

I read
with utmost interest the article entitled Nigeria: Politics of Finance
and Democracy by Ndubisi Obiorah in THISDAY
edition of Sunday, December 21, 2003. The article discussed what
may be described as one of the main issues in Nigerian politics.
He described the present political system in the country as a "rentier
politics" characterised by the dominance of 'electoral machines'
which are controlled by political entrepreneurs comprising
largely of wealthy former military officers and their civilian
business cronies. In practical terms, the 'rentier' political
system may be described as a steep hierarchical order of
patronage in which leadership is determined by bureaucratic
means and political influence is maintained by financial and/or
material inducements, ethnic and religious sentiments and
deliberate exclusion of opposition. As observed in the THISDAY
article, political movements representing the interests of the
poor and the disadvantaged that could have served to moderate
the influence of the dominant political parties have been
systematically excluded from effective participation in the
political arena by a combination of legal instruments and their
relative paucity of resources compared with the vast financial
resources available to the dominant political entrepreneurs.
Some political analysts now see Nigeria as a one party state
under the control of the so called political entrepreneurs
though we now have thirty registered political parties in the
country.

The 'rentier politics' or what I prefer to call 'politics of
patronage' is clearly different from the politics of the
pre-independence era which Chief Lateef Jakande, the former
governor of Lagos state described as 'politics of development'.
In the pre-independence era, political actors derive their
influence and authority directly from the people who willingly
exchange their votes for public services. But, in the patronage
system, loyalty and commitment to the goals of the political
entrepreneurs is the main source of political influence and
authority. The election process has been reduced to mere
formality, as the people are made to vote either on sentiments
or through financial inducements, and the art of rigging of
elections has become technically sophisticated to the extent
that it is now quite difficult to prove legally. The efficiency
of the 'politics of patronage' in modern day Nigeria where
poverty is dominant and individuals have no rights in relation
to the state is reflected by the outcome of the last general
elections in the country and the subsequent neglect of the
wishes of the people by the President.

In April 2003, General Olusegun Obasanjo (rtd) was elected with
an embarrassingly large margin compared with the runners up, as
the President of the country for a second term on the platform
of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Although he was close to
impeachment by the PDP dominated National Assembly more than
once in his first four year term, he won the ticket of his party
with the full backing of the political entrepreneurs with a very
large margin. It is shameful that in a nation of over one
hundred and twenty million people; a nation that is home to some
of the best minds in the world, can be made to believe that the
'presidency cap' of the country fits only one man. What I see in
the country is a sophisticated political manipulation of the
people for the personal benefit of the ruling class or the
political entrepreneurs.

The late sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo in his books Voice of
Wisdom and Path to Nigerian Greatness noted that the evils of
foreign rule may be far less than the evils which may be
perpetrated under self-governance by the affluent natives or the
local moguls who, if left to their own devices may constitute
themselves into class oligarchy and secure the supreme power for
themselves in the form of tyranny and arbitrary dictatorship. He
stated further that native tyranny and oppression will become
more pronounced when a cabal or group of feudal lords seize
political power and refuse to hand over to others outside his
own hierarchy. For Chief Awolowo, the inability of a regime -
civilian or military - to extricate itself from the 'sweet uses
and chuckles' of power breeds tenacity of office. He defined
this as a 'political monstrosity whose characteristics are
inordinate and shameless love of power for its own sake...'
Chief Awolowo must be turning in his grave now because of the
political situation in the country.

As preparations for the 2007 national general elections take
shape, one thing seems almost certain - the political
entrepreneurs that produced General Obasanjo as the President of
the country in 1999 and 2003 would most likely produce the next
president. Should this happen again, it would be most
unfortunate for the people of the country who work day and night
only to feed themselves and yet were unable to earn enough to
provide for at least two decent meals per day. Meanwhile, when
people like Chief Gani Fawehinmi and his National Conscience
Party who remains one of the most persistent opponents of the
political entrepreneurs are yet to fully recover from the losses
in the last election, the political entrepreneurs are already at
work towards the 2007 elections. It is in this regard that I
have decided to write this article. Like Ndubisi Obiorah, many
commentators on the political situation in the country often
describe the prevailing situation in the country without taken
into consideration why the situation is as it is, and how the
situation may be changed. My aim therefore, is to suggest ways
through which political opposition in the country may be more
effective as the 2007 national general elections approaches. To
arrive at these suggestions however, I took into consideration
some fundamental principles of politics supported with examples
from the Nigerian situation.

According to the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, politics
is defined as "the activities involved in getting and using
power in public life,. and being able to influence decisions
that affect a country or a society". This concept of politics
combined with my experience as an active political agent has
taught me three fundamental principles of politics, which in my
opinion, explains some of the problems of effective political
opposition in the country. These are: (1) power is the essence
of politics just as money is the essence of business. (2) while
every political position has attached to it some political
powers, the effectiveness of the power depend on the influence
of the politician; and (3) political power and influence are
never given, they are taken. Although these principles may not
be generally acceptable, in my opinion, the continued success of
the patronage system of politics in the country may be explained
partially by these three principles. I will take them one after
the other and explain how non-observance of the principles has
limited the effectiveness of the opposition political
associations in the country.

Not many of the politicians in the opposition group recognize
power as the essence of the political game. They often define
their roles in the political process too narrowly sometimes on
principles and sometimes based on misplaced priorities and
self-interest. A classical example is the failure of the
Alliance for Democracy in the last April national general
elections. The leaders of the party, because of their misplaced
priorities and self interest, lost woefully to the Peoples
Democratic Party. Greed and ethnic sentiments were the main
determinants of their political moves, they forgot that the
political game is played by political parties and that
individuals are only agents of the party. The failure of the
Campaign for Democracy to follow the political agitations of
1993 after the annulment of the June 12 elections to a logical
conclusion may be described as a principled neglect of power as
the essence of politics. The Campaign for Democracy was then a
political movement with clear ideological posture. However,
after the annulment of the June 12 elections, the organization
commands so much political influences that it may have been able
to gain some legal powers which may have pave the way for the
emergence of a genuine strong and effective opposition.

It is important to try to gain some insight into how the ruling
class in the country perceive politics and power. Primarily
because the political class evolve largely from a military
system, politics is seen more as a battle of supremacy where
laws and rules are only applied to losers in the political game.
The losers of any war are often accused and/or tried for the
same offence that the winner also commits. Similarly, a coup
d'etat is only a crime if it was unsuccessful. The Ngige saga in
Anambra and the Omisore case may be explained by this principle.
For the ruling political leaders in the country, it is a
supremacy game, and quite unfortunate that things turn out the
way they did without a clear loser to punish. Mustapha and
Bamayi are the unfortunate scapegoats of the Abacha government,
just as Umaru Dikko and others were the unfortunate scapegoats
of the Shagari government and Afolabi and others are the much
needed prove of the anti-corruption campaign of the present
government. There is absolutely no intention to convict anyone
because they all still remain potential Presidents, Ministers,
Governors, Senators, etc.

How about the much talk about face-off between the president and
the vice president; IBB and Atiku; Buhari and Babangida; Ogbeh
and Obasanjo; etc.? Crisis and confrontations are the means
through which individual political actors and/or agents
negotiate for power and authority. This may explain why the
President embarked on a review of the local government system
and the deregulation of the petroleum products market shortly
after being sworn-in despite popular criticism. The crisis gave
him the opportunity to assert his authority and to take control
of the system. His reaction to the agitation by the Nigeria
Labour Congress (NLC) following the deregulation of the
petroleum products market in October, is a true demonstration of
the attitude of the President and the political entrepreneurs in
general to politics and power. While the NLC was concerned with
the interest of the people, the President was mainly concerned
with his powers.

The political entrepreneurs and their cronies always
deliberately over estimate the intentions of the opposition with
the aim of intimidating them while also enhancing their own
scope of manoeuvring in negotiations. The opposition, on the
other hand, always seem to define their interest too narrowly,
thereby reducing their power and influence. To be effective, the
opposition must always strive to maximize its powers and
influence. The House of Representative under the leadership of
Alhaji Gali Umar Na'aba is a good example of effective
opposition, despite the negative image painted by the press. It
is very unlikely that the House actually intended to impeach the
President, but by expressing the intension to do so, they
maximize their powers, influence and scope of negotiation.
Although Alhaji Na'aba has been striped of his powers, he would
remain in the minds of the masses as the Speaker who speak up
for fairness and defended the constitution. He is also a
potentially good candidate for the opposition parties in the
country. The recent demand by NLC to return petroleum products
prices to its pre-deregulation prices is a good example of
effective opposition. It is very unlikely that the NLC actually
wanted a return of the pre-deregulation prices but by making the
demand, they gained some negotiation advantages.

The power of any politician is detennined by his/her influence,
but in Nigeria, people more often associate political power with
political positions. Every political position has attached to it
some powers however the effectiveness of such powers depends on
the influence of the politician. For example, the powers of the
Chairman of Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) under Alhaji M. D.
Yusuf should not be expected to be the same as under Chief
Sunday Awoniyi, primarily because the political influence of the
two persons are not the same. Chief Awoniyi as a Yoruba
northerner gives a very distinct image of the ACF which is very
impressive. It may also have very serious implications for the
politics of the country toward 2007 and beyond.

Generally, political office seekers tap into the influence of
some notable politicians who has large political influence. This
phenomenon is popularly called 'godfatherism' in Nigerian
politics and it is popularly condemned. The ruling political
leaders however know that the phenomenon is very much a part of
the political power game and there is very little that can be
done about it. Persons like General Ibrahim Babangida (rtd) and
the strong man of Ibadan politics, Alhaji Adedibu are renowned
political god-fathers whose influence can not be
over-emphasized. Such people control enormous powers which often
supersede those of political office holders in the sense that
they can influence decisions at different levels. The powers of
President Obasanjo are for example constrained by the political
influence of IBB whether it is acknowledged or not. Similarly,
the powers of Governor Ladoja are constrained by the political
influence of Alhaji Adedibu and the Anambra crisis have been
described as a power game between the godfather and the godson.

Unlike the ruling political leaders, the opposition group has
not been able to make effective use of godfathers in politics
neither have they recognized that the effectiveness of political
power depends on the political influence of the person occupying
the position. First, many of the newly registered political
parties were established by persons whose political influence is
limited to their party, while there are so many political
heavy-weights with enormous influence but which are not
associated with any political party for one reason or the other.
Although someone like Chief Gani Fawehunmi is popular among the
youths, his background as a political activist suggests the need
for him to work with liberal progressive political groups such
as the National Reformation Party of Chief Anthony Enahoro. It
has to be recognised that political advocacy is completely
different from election-based politics. The knowledge, skills,
and personality that is required for political advocacy is
clearly different from those that are needed for electioneering
campaign. Some political analysts believe that General Obasanjo,
based on his own personal influence can not win an election in
his own ward or in any part of the country, but with strong
support from the political entrepreneurs, he won the
presidential ticket twice. In Oyo state, Senator (Dr.) Peter
Adeyemo is perhaps the best gubernatorial candidate in the April
2003 elections, but he lacks the needed political support from
the political heavy-weights in the state. Although the people
generally like him and identify with him, they did not give him
their votes because he was unable to involve their recognised
leaders in his campaign.

Individuals have specific needs and aspirations and many times
they also have real problems and challenges. In addition,
because individuals are endowed with intelligence, they can
reason and articulate situations; they know what is basically
good and what is basically bad. Many progressive politicians and
development practitioners assume that once an individual is made
to realise what is basically good s/he will do it. In the last
two decades or more, many political activists and the
progressive political class have based most of their activities
on the intellectual ability on man. They assume that people,
knowing the good and the bad, will willingly choose the good
over the bad. They expect the Nigerian people to react against
the ruling class which has continuously misrule them. People
like Chief Gani Fawehinmi, Late Fela Anikulapo-Kuti, Tai Solarin,
Pa Anthony Enahoro, and many others who fought for justice,
equality, and good governance belong to this category.

Experience has shown that the actions and behaviours of people
are determined more by their needs and aspirations as well as
the problems and challenges which they face. Political
entrepreneurs realise this fact and hence they derive their
powers mostly by ensuring that the people are maintained in a
perpetual state of dependency in which the people always look up
to them to solve their immediate problems and to meet their
needs and aspirations. According to Chief Obafemi Awolowo, an
ignorant and poverty-stricken people are the easiest preys to
political enslavement and economic exploitation. The
hierarchical political patronage system in Nigeria and many
other African countries actually feeds on the ignorance and
poverty of the people. One man that has perfectly mastered how
this works is the Maradona, General Ibrahim Babangida. It is
well known that he knows how to effectively meet the needs of
different people at different times, under different
circumstances. As he solves people's problems and help them to
meet their needs and aspirations they willingly submit to him
and allow him to influence them. This is perhaps responsible for
the enormous influence and powers which the man continue to have
in the nation's political process. General Obasanjo's lack of
concern for the needs and aspirations of the people is one major
reason why he lacks personal political influence distinct from
the influence associated with the of fice of the President.

The important point is to realise that good talk, principled
actions and sound ideologies are not suff~cient to make
realistic political impact in the real world. Money and election
malpractices will continue to be the dominant factors in the
nation's electoral system as long as the people are poor and
lacks the capacity to make effective demand from government. The
opposition political groups have to support their principles and
ideologies with well planned actions that will touch the life of
the people directly. The failure of the Alliance for Democracy
in the South West is a good illustration of the political
behaviour of people. The Alliance for Democracy erroneously
believes that the people of the region supported them because of
their pro-democracy activism and support for the principles of
Awolowo. It is a known fact that the governors of the party were
selected in 1999 on the ground of their activities during the
1993 pro-democracy movement and they repeated the process in
2003. Unlike Awolowo which they claim to be following, the
governors of the party scored very low in terms of public
service delivery in the four years between 1999 and 2003.
Meanwhile, people like Otunba Gbenga Daniel and Mr. Ayo Fayose
both of which contested on the platform of the People's
Democratic Party in Ogun and Ekiti states respectively were
known to be engaged in state wide public services few years
before the elections. Through these services, the needs of the
people were met and so the people identified with them and gave
them their votes.

From the discussion of the three principles above, it is clear
that political influence is very essential in the political
process. Therefore, one may like to ask the question - how do
politicians acquire political influence? In my opinion, there
are essentially five inter-related strategies which are often
used by politicians to gain public influence. The first, as
discussed earlier is public service. Chief M. K. O. Abiola is
one man that used this strategy effectively. He invested
massively in sports and education in the eighties and early
nineties to the admiration of almost every Nigerian. There is
hardly any state in the country where Chief Abiola did not have
a physical presence in terms of public service. He was able to
touch the life of almost every Nigerian either directly or
indirectly, and hence majority of the people identify with him
and were willing to follow him. Since 1999, apart from Governors
Ayo Fayose and Gbenga Daniel, the other politicians that use
public service strategy includes Governors Bola Tinubu, Urji
Kalu, Adamu Mu'azu; Senator Peter Adeyemo among others. Chief
Gani Fawehinmi is also another politician that has gained
significant political influence through public service.
Political radicalism or activism is a form of public service and
it is a very potent means of gaining political influence. People
like Alhaji Lam Adesina, Fela Anikulapo-Kuti; Alhaji Abubaker
Rimi, etc. are well known for their political radicalism before
they recognised political leaders.

While public service is a very effective strategy for gaining
political influence, it has very high cost both in terms of
time, money and personal involvement. Public service, the type
that Chief Abiola engaged in, requires enormous amount of money
to be effective, while people like Chief Gani Fawehinmi had to
pay for their political radicalism with repeated imprisonments.
However, these short-comings may be avoided through intellectual
contributions to national political and development issues.
Although this may be classified as a form of public service, we
discuss it here as a distinct political strategy. In the last
few years, Governor Chimaroke Nnamani has been using this
strategy effectively. General Babangida also used the strategy
partially with his erudite speeches and the wide variety of
books that were published during his regime. Furthermore,
General Babangida attracted many intellectuals to his government
- Jerry Gana, Olikoye RansomeKuti, Babatunde Fafunwa, Akin
Mabogunje, Ojetunji Aboyade, among others. This strategy is
relatively less costly and it holds enormous potentials for
opposition political groups. The only main disadvantage of the
strategy is that it will not directly meet the needs and
aspirations of the people. In addition, because there is a
general disregard for knowledge in the country, one has to be
highly innovative in using the strategy, particularly in
combination with other strategies.

Financial and other material inducement are very effective in
gaining political influence in the country and this will likely
remain so for some time. The primary reason for this is that the
social institutions for the allocation of resources and
opportunities in the country have failed and there is poverty
and dependency in the land. An indication of the seriousness of
the dependency problem in the politics of the country is the
fact that the National Assembly had to address the issue of
demands for money and material gifts by members of their
constituency particularly during festive periods. In the south
west, some people talk of the 'Alamala Politics', to describe
the situation in which politicians has to continuously feed
their followers daily particularly during elections. There are
several accounts of how the present PDP government in the
country used financial inducement to buy votes in the last April
2003 elections. At the intra- or inter-party levels, contracts,
financial rewards and appointments are used to negotiate for
political support. The shameful behaviour of Alhaji Abdulkadir,
the immediate past National President of the Alliance for
Democracy, is an example of how material inducements influence
the political power game at the institutional level.

The financial inducement strategy is being used mainly by the
political entrepreneurs. This strategy as well as sentimentalism
tends to shift focus away from the issues and challenges in the
country.

Therefore, one thing that the opposition groups can do is to
find ways to maintain focus on issues and problems.
Sentimentalism, like financial inducements are designed to meet
the needs of the people. While financial inducements and public
service were designed to meet the material needs in a poverty
stricken society, sentimentalism as a political strategy to gain
influence, is designed to meet the emotional needs of the
people. Humanity in general places a lot of emphasis on their
roots, cultural identity and spiritual belief. Hence, ethnicity
and/or tribalism and religion are critical issues in politics in
general, but it is particularly more relevant in poor
communities because in the absence of material holdings, poor
people always tend to guide their ethnic and religious identity
as essential resource without which their life will not have any
meaning. The political entrepreneurs in the country always take
advantage of these emotional needs by the people of the country
while the needs were most often neglected by the opposition
groups.

Politicking is the last strategy of gaining political influence.
Politicking is essentially about sociopolitical relationships.
That is, the art of building political friendship and
partnership based on interests, goals and ideologies. This is an
area in which I have come to respect and admire the political
entrepreneurs in the country. The politicking that produced
General Obasanjo as the presidential candidate of the PDP in
1999 and 2003 is particularly highly commendable. It shows that
the political entrepreneurs in the country are highly
sophisticated and disciplined, unlike the opposition groups.
They have the ability to make very important critical
concessions and to defer gratification. In my opinion, it is the
ability to play politics objectively that actually separate the
political entrepreneurs from their opponents many of who often
place personal interests and sentiments far above group goals.
One major weakness of the so called progressives in the country
is their inability to accommodate alternative opinions. Because
of their dogmatic approach to politics they exclude many people
and institutions that could help their cause. The opposition
groups are often unrealistic in their approach to politicking.

Rethinking Political Opposition for Greater Effectiveness

There is need to have a critical rethink of the political system
in the country particularly the system and style of opposition.
Perhaps the most important fact to consider in this respect is
that we now have a democratic system of governance as against
military dictatorship. Unlike during military rule when there
are very few institutionalised means of opposing the government
in power, there are a wide range of opportunities for
constructive political opposition in the new democratic system
of government. First the opposing political groups have the
opportunity to contest any election through registered political
parties. Secondly, there are opportunities for the opposition
groups to lobby for specific legislations and policies either by
lobbying the legislators or through systematic public outreach
activities. Lastly, there are opportunities for political
opposition groups to take legal actions against the ruling party
or the government. Therefore, for a more effective political
opposition in the country, the following may be taken into
consideration:

Recognise power as the essence of politics:

As discussed earlier, power is the essence of politics just as
money is the essence of business. Unless a politician has power
s/he can not have much influence in public life. Many of the
existing political parties in the country do not seem to have
any real interest in power and as such they cannot provide
effective opposition to the ruling political party in the
country. It is reasonable to expect that if the Alliance for
Democracy had contested the presidential elections in April
2003, the outcome of the elections would have produced a totally
different result and the political situation in the country
would have been more competitive.

Focus on issues and processes:

Considering the large financial resources and experience of the
present ruling class, it is very unlikely that the opposition
group can oppose the political entrepreneurs effectively in
their own game. Therefore, there is need for the opposition
groups to shift the focus of political debates away from
sentimentalism to address concrete development issues and
problems as well as processes. It is particularly quite
unfortunate that none of the other twenty nine political parties
in the country is making any systematic effort to challenge some
of the unpopular policies of the present government. The
opposition of the deregulation of the downstream oil sector for
example have been very weak. To be effective, the opposition
groups need to equip themselves with much more information than
is available on the pages of newspapers about the downstream
sector. Decisions on key national development issues such as the
deregulation of the downstream oil sector needs to be based on a
rigorous knowledge and understanding of the sector and not mere
speculations based on theoretical abstraction. Where necessary,
opposition groups should make use of independent policy
think-tanks.

Strengthen political relationships and networks:

It is good to have thirty political parties in the country.
However, membership and followership of the different parties
are limited to specific interest groups. There is need for
effective politicking and for the political parties to form
alliances and partnership with each other as well as other
interest groups across the country and even internationally. If
the opposition groups are to make the necessary impact on the
political system in the country, they will have to engage more
on discussions and negotiations among themselves and with
politically influential people who are not publicly known to be
in the ruling political party. There are a good number of
renowned politicians in the country who for one reason or the
other are unable to join the PDP and would not like to be
associated with a weak political party. If the opposition group
are to be effective, I will like to see such radical
combinations such as a Na'aba and Kalu presidential ticket on
the platform of the Alliance for Democracy; Nnamani and Adeyemo
on the platform of the National Reformation Party; or Abubarkar
Rimi and Ngige ticket on the platform of APGA. The possibilities
are limitless.

Engage in information dissemination and policy outreach
activities:

One of the strategies of the ruling party and the political
entrepreneurs in the country is to impoverish the people both
materially and intellectually as a means of disempowering them
both politically and economically. The political opposition
groups in the country can enhance their public influence if they
can systematically empower the people by providing them with
useful information about politics and policy. For example,
Akitiyan Senator which means 'the efforts of a Senator' is a
Yoruba radio programme which became very popular in Oyo state in
less than one year because it tends to empower the people by
providing information about happenings in the Senate and the
policies of government in general. The popularity of Senator
Adeyemo, the initiator of the radio programme may be attributed
largely to this radio programme. There are many other innovative
ways through which sensitive information can be disseminated to
the public and political actors.

Dr. Mabawonku is a development policy analyst based in
Ibadan. Nigeria